Check the message Welcome greeting published in the News Bulletin Board.

Dear student please edit your profile uploading a photo where your face is clearly visible.

The purpose of the virtual meetings is to answer questions and not to make a summary of the study material.

This presentation is based on (Lewicki et al., 2024, Chapter 5)

Purpose

• Explore and understand the ethical standards commonly accepted in a negotiation process in order to detect and deal with deceptive tactics.

Ethics is understand as the social standards that are apply to examine what is right or wrong in a specific situation or a process to establish such standards (Lewicki et al., 2024, Chapter 5, p. 136).

The ethical considerations in a negotiation are related to how the exchange of information occurs (Lewicki & Robinson, 1998).

• Because the exchange of information in the negotiation process is vital, the analysis of ethics is associated with examining whether or not there is a dishonest communication.

There are tactics that are not ethical and that can be quickly identified, such as stealing confidential data from the counterpart.

• These types of tactics must be removed from the negotiator’s toolbox.

However, in the context of negotiation there are gray areas. These gray areas are known as ethically ambiguous tactics within the theory of negotiation.

• These tactics are related to what the negotiators say or what they claim they will do concerning what they really do.

Gray areas within a negotiating context regarding ethically ambiguous tactics are presented due to the 2 dilemmas a negotiator faces:

• Dilemma of honesty

  • How much truth should be revealed to the counterpart?

• Dilemma of trust

  • How much should a negotiator believe what the counterpart says?

Why do negotiators use deceptive tactics in the context of a negotiation?

• Need to acquire greater power through the manipulation of information to get closer to the target point

• Use of a more competitive negotiation style¹

Effectiveness

• Deceptive tactics generate positive consequences when the outcome of the negotiation improves compared to whether a negotiator had acted ethically and if the conduct is not punished where the consequences materialize in the short run.

• Deceptive tactics generate negative consequences because the reputation of the negotiator is damaged where the consequences materialize in the future.

Reactions of Others

• Deceptive tactics generate positive consequences only if constituents, indirect actors or interest observers considered appropriate to use this type of tactics².

• Deceptive tactics generate negative consequences because retaliations occur directly from the counterpart and possibly from the constituents, indirect actors or interest observers if they consider that the tactic used is inappropriate³.

Reactions of Self

• Deceptive tactics generate positive consequences only if the negotiator does not suffer from guilt, remorse or discomfort.

• Deceptive tactics generate negative consequences when the negotiator suffers from guilt, remorse or discomfort for having used these tactics⁴

My personal opinion:

• Read the article (Adler, 2007):

  • Before the Bargaining Begins

  • During the Bargaining Process

• I think the best approach is to follow the recommendations in the section Before the Bargaining Begins because they are carried out during the planning stage of a negotiation where there is more time and information that can be collected in order to respond adequately to deceptive tactics.

To my family that supports me

To the taxpayers of Colombia and the UMNG students who pay my salary

To the Business Science and R4DS Online Learning communities where I learn R and \(\pi\)-thon

To the R Core Team, the creators of RStudio IDE, Quarto and the authors and maintainers of the packages tinytex for allowing me to access these tools without paying for a license